Hi, I'm looking to top off my muzzleloader with a new scope and I think
I've narrowed it down to these three. I think I prefer a 2-7 and would
like a good BDC system.

From my research, it appears as though each has their advantages.

The Diamondback is optically superior to the others, a greater FOV, and
the best warranty (in Canada) by far and it is the cheapest (about 220
bucks) but it has the worst BDC of the three as it is not tailored to
muzzleloading applications but rather just measured in MOA so I would
have to play around to see if I could get the drops to match up to a
load. It also comes in my preferred 2-7 magnification (but dominates the
others in FOV even at 3-9).

The 3200 Bone Collector has the rainguard feature which would make it
significantly better in adverse weather optically. It has a good BDC
system tailored to muzzleloading, and a decent warranty in Canada
against manufacturers defects. At 315, it is significantly more
expensive than the diamondback and only comes in 3-9.

The Leupold is the smallest of the three and definitely has the best BDC
system. However its glass is not up to the level of either of the other
two scopes as I understand it. It's warranty is equal with that of the
vortex, but not superior and its price comes in at 313 here.

I like the rainguard and I like the Ultimate slam's BDC, but the better
glass, cheaper price and 2-7 option is making me lean towards the
diamondback. Anyone care to convince me otherwise??

Yeah, I REALLY wanted one of those vipers but I couldn't get it on sale in Canada and the US has very strict laws about exporting scopes. Ironically, it's totally legal for me to buy a muzzleloader in the US and export it to Canada with no major paperwork which is what I did.

Yeah, I REALLY wanted one of those vipers but I couldn't get it on sale in Canada and the US has very strict laws about exporting scopes. Ironically, it's totally legal for me to buy a muzzleloader in the US and export it to Canada with no major paperwork which is what I did.

Best be careful...big brother is watching.

If we're not suppose to eat animals...how come they're made of meat? Anomymous

The leupold has the advantage of adjusting the power so that the trajectory will be accurate based on the load... 2 or 3 pellets. Maybe I'm just a little naive about the different systems, but it seems that would give a little more flexibility. Nevertheless, you've steered me even closer to the Diamondback... Thanks!!

As for Big Brother... Like I said, I looked into it (thoroughly) and its perfectly legal for a Canadian to buy and export a muzzlelaoder from the states. But not the scope. Crazy.

Last question. Is the rainguard worth an extra 100 bucks or will a pair of butler creek caps protect me enough from fogging?

Figuring that a given ballistic reticle will exactly fit your trajectory is like chasing rainbows.2 or 3 pellets of Pyrodex or 777 with what bullet? There are dozens of possible muzzleloader bullets, all with different ballistic coefficients, not to mention the variations in powders.No matter what you use, you will have to go to the range, and your real world POI will vary some from the results that a software program like Nikon uses (because velocity will vary,and BCs will vary, as will atmospheric conditions).

By all accounts, the Bushnell coating is pretty handy. My dad's 4200 is great for rainy day hunts.

However the Diamondback is fully multicoated, which isn't the case with the Bushnell 3200.Is the Nikon Omega a choice? They have great eye relief for hard kicking inlines, but are also only fully coated as with the 3200.

Figuring that a given ballistic reticle will exactly fit your trajectory is like chasing rainbows.2 or 3 pellets of Pyrodex or 777 with what bullet? There are dozens of possible muzzleloader bullets, all with different ballistic coefficients, not to mention the variations in powders.No matter what you use, you will have to go to the range, and your real world POI will vary some from the results that a software program like Nikon uses (because velocity will vary,and BCs will vary, as will atmospheric conditions).

By all accounts, the Bushnell coating is pretty handy. My dad's 4200 is great for rainy day hunts.

However the Diamondback is fully multicoated, which isn't the case with the Bushnell 3200.Is the Nikon Omega a choice? They have great eye relief for hard kicking inlines, but are also only fully coated as with the 3200.

Thanks for the post. I think I'm talked out of the extra money for the 3200 or UltimateSlam. Scope covers and better glass on the other models makes up for their advantages.

That said... Oh boy.... Now I have to consider the Omega!! This is tough!!! I didn't really notice how short the eye relief was on the diamondback. 3.3-3.5 on the 3-9 and 3.1-3.5 on the 2-7. But from what I've read, it seems like on a muzzleloader I shouldn't need TOO much eye relief because they aren't as hard kicking as a CF. Is this true or am I gonna be dealing with some scope eye when I lay down my next buck because I forgot to be careful about the short relief in my excitement??

New last question. I've been leaning away from 3-9's because I could see 9x being too much magnification for most situations aside from the longest shots. Am I wrong in thinking this way? I figured the greater FOV offered by a 2-7 would be more advantageous for most shots within the 200-250 max yards I would be shooting. This is especially true since the Omega seems to have a super tight FOV (I guess because of the longer eye relief?), the Omega's FOV at 100 yards is 8.4 compared to 14.8 on the Diamondback's 3-9 and 19.3 on the 2-7.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum